Re: [libvirt] Network device abstraction aka virtual switch - V3
On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 04:40:19PM +0200, Gerhard Stenzel wrote:
On Sun, 2011-06-12 at 20:29 -0400, Laine Stump wrote:
> <!-- A macvtap passthrough connection (one guest interface per dev)
> -->
> <network>
> <name>red-network</name>
> <forward layer='link' mode='passthrough'
dev='eth10'/>
> <interface dev='eth10'/>
> <interface dev='eth11'/>
> <interface dev='eth12'/>
> <interface dev='eth13'/>
> <interface dev='eth14'/>
> <interface dev='eth15'/>
> <interface dev='eth16'/>
> <interface dev='eth17'/>
> </forward>
> </network>
If this example describes a scenario with a SR-IOV card, where eth10 is
the physical function and eth11-eth17 are the virtual functions and
libvirt can attach a VM to any of the VFs, then I would not list eth10
in the interface pool for passthrough devices.
All interfaces listed here should be considered equal for attaching VMs
to. I don't think the network code has to even care about whether a NIC
in the XML is a virtual or a physical function. The application will
discover NICs and whether they are virtual/physical functions via the
node device APIs in libvirt. It will then decide which of the NICs to
use when creating the network XML.
Daniel
--
|: http://berrange.com -o- http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :|
|: http://libvirt.org -o- http://virt-manager.org :|
|: http://autobuild.org -o- http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :|
|: http://entangle-photo.org -o- http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc :|